IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1978684394-400_5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dental examinations for quality control: peer review versus self assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Milgrom, P.
  • Weinstein, P.
  • Ratener, P.
  • Read, W.A.
  • Morrison, K.

Abstract

This paper reports the dental care norms for restorative dentistry collected from examinations of 1,466 patients in 105 dental offices in Washington State during 1976. These results are part of a larger study. 'Assessment of Care and Continuing Dental Education, being conducted by the University of Washington with the endorsement and cooperation of the Washington State Dental Association. Treatments in volunteer offices were evaluated either by colleagues (peer review) or by the practitioner himself (self-assessment). Two hundred twenty-four of 1,196 eligible dentists volunteered for the study. Patients from the practitioners' offices were randomy selected from office files by project staff. The study tests the proposition that, using standardized clinical evaluation procedures and comparable samples of treatment, dentists will be more critical of their own work than that of others. Results suggest a generally high level of care provided by volunteer practitioners and that self-assessments were significantly more critical than peer review.

Suggested Citation

  • Milgrom, P. & Weinstein, P. & Ratener, P. & Read, W.A. & Morrison, K., 1978. "Dental examinations for quality control: peer review versus self assessment," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 68(4), pages 394-400.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1978:68:4:394-400_5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1978:68:4:394-400_5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.